. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/GEN/109 
20 April 2006 
 
 (06-1825) 
Negotiating Group on Rules 
 Original:   English 
 
 
INDEPENDENT GROUP OF EXPERTS FOR THE ENFORCEMENT  
OF INITIATION STANDARDS 
Submission from the European Communities  
 
 
 The following communication, dated 19 April 2006,  is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the European Commission.   The submitting delegation has requested that th is paper, which was submitted to the Rules 
Negotiation Group as an informal document (JOB(06)/90) also be circulated as a formal document. 
 
_______________ 
 
 Background 
 
 
 In March 2003, the EC submitted a reflection pa per on a swift control mechanism to address 
unjustified initiations (TN/RL/W/67), given that curre nt dispute settlement procedures do not offer an 
appropriate reply to this type of breaches.  This  submission put forward three possible solutions to 
solve disputes with regard to initiations:  (1) fast track initiation panels;  (2) arbitration;  or (3) a 
standing advisory body or permanent group of experts.  
 
 Discussions have shown that Members recognise un justified initiations to be a problem that 
needs to be addressed.  However, the two first so lutions were generally considered as difficult to 
apply. It was argued that fast track initiation panels  would create an imbalance in panel procedures for 
AD with regard to other areas.  Arbitration would also be impractical as the Member initiating the investigation could, by definition, refuse it.  
 
 Nevertheless, the possibility of appointing an  independent group of experts to examine the 
evidence which led an authority to initiate, and rele ase an opinion with regard to its appropriateness, 
was considered by many as a workable option.   
Proposed solution
 
 -  We believe that it is worth pursuing the option of the creation of a group of independent 
experts, and to examine in particular, the way such  a group would work in practice.  Thus, we are 
considering proposing that:  
 -  Any Member subject to an investigation whic h considers that the evidence contained in the 
complaint does not fulfil the requirements of Article s 5.1, and 5.2 of the ADA or that the authorities 
of the importing country have not acted in accordance with Articles 5.3, 5.4, 5.6 and 5.8 of the ADA, 
could call upon the group of  experts in order to obtain an independent assessment of the facts. TN/RL/GEN/109 
Page 2  
 
   -  The Member carrying out the investigati on would be required to provide the necessary 
assistance, in particular by providing to the group the facts on which the decision to initiate was based. It could be discussed whether third parties s hould be allowed to participate in this process.  
 -  The group of experts should be composed of highly experienced officials in AD.   -  There should be only one
 hearing of the parties before the gr oup of experts, in order to limit 
the costs of such a process, and the opinion would be  issued within a specified deadline.  Members 
could discuss the appropriateness of specifying a fi xed deadline for the group to release its opinion. 
 -  Although the opinion issued would not be binding (i.e. the investigating authority could 
proceed with the investigation or decide to termin ate it and tackle the problems found before initiating 
a new investigation), the opinion of the group of experts could be presented as additional evidence 
before DSU proceedings.  Even if not legally binding, successive negative opinions on a Member’s 
initiation standards would highlight unsustainable systemic breaches of the ADA.  
Legal text  
 The EC propose the following text: 
Article x 
Group of Independent Experts 
x.1 The Committee on Anti-dumping Practices shall establish a group of experts composed of 
five investigating authorities’ officials from di fferent Members, highly qualified in anti-dumping 
matters.  These experts shall serve in thei r individual capacities and not as government 
representatives, nor as representatives of any organization.  Members shall therefore not give them instructions, nor seek to influence them as indivi duals with regard to matters before the group of 
experts.  The composition of the group shall be estab lished following a proposal of the Secretariat.  
The Secretariat shall act as the secretariat to the group of independent experts.  
x.2 If a Member considers that the evidence on th e basis of which an investigation has been 
initiated against its exports does not fulfil the requireme nts of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 5, or that 
the investigating authorities have not acted in accord ance with paragraphs 3, 4, 6 and 8 of the same 
Article, such Member may request the opinion of the group of independent expert s.  The request shall 
be made in writing and shall clearly identif y the specific issues and alleged violations. 
x.3 The authorities of the Member which initiated such investigation, and those of the exporting 
Member, shall co-operate to the best of th eir ability with the work of such group.  
x.4 Any information which is confidential, within the meaning of paragraph 5 of Article 6, shall 
be treated as such by the group of independent expe rts and shall not be disclosed, even after the group 
or any of its elements is discharged of its functions.  
x.5 The group of independent experts shall hold one hearing with the parties and issue its opinion 
within a specified deadline [or within Z days/months ].  Such opinion may be presented before a panel 
established according to Article 17 of the ADA, although the panel may arrive at a different 
assessment. 
__________